If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Forget that the Libertarian Party wants to put an end to the IRS(flat tax), the Fed Reserve, pass a Balanced Budget Amendment and end many of the nanny state programs, all the detractors can focus on is drugs! Our drug policy, War Against Drugs is a failure and time to try something else. No one is going to go out and start shooting Heroin because it is legal! Instead of spending billions annually, a small portion can be put into drug education, the rest of the money can be saved to tax payers. Also, consider that all the current policy is doing is making the drug cartels rich beyond imagination! Sarge, these are not modern day hippies. When I attended my first meeting in Baton Rouge, I wore dress slacks and an open collar dress shirt only to realize I had under-dressed.. These young professionals were dressed in suits or dresses and not reeking of Patchoully Oil.

I think we agree a lot on the issues, but when talking about the "GOP Revolt" (the topic of this thread)...why are we going into illegal drugs???

You made the statement that tea partiers are the only true conservatives. I was just disagreeing and saying that, while better than establishment republicans, most tea party folks are not true conservatives who want to limit government. Drugs was one of three points I gave as examples on how to shrink govt and once again you choose to focus on that to try and discredit the other two.

I would be happy with the legalization of marijuana, but I don't need a law that tells me not to do cocaine, heroin, meth and LSD. I know there are consequences for those actions (not unlike the consequences of antidepressants and stimulants that are handed out like candy by doctors). I would argue that more lives each year are ruined by alcohol and tobacco than other illegal drugs. If we used the money we spend on the drug wars to actually teach people common sense, we would do a lot better.

Drugs should be legalized, wars should only be defensive (which means on our land or in the ocean), and free markets are the only fair markets.

Originally Posted by mudminnow

You made the statement that tea partiers are the only true conservatives. I was just disagreeing and saying that, while better than establishment republicans, most tea party folks are not true conservatives who want to limit government. Drugs was one of three points I gave as examples on how to shrink govt and once again you choose to focus on that to try and discredit the other two.

Drugs - There are those of us who believe the incentives are not in the right order to successfully carry on that war, but believe it should be fought.

Wars - there are times when the toughest guy on the block needs to show that - that there have been no warlike acts until 9-11 on our shores says some of what is done is right.

Free Markets - only exist if there is reciprocation.

As for your's & Franco's banner carrying about the libertarians - I believe Zeus summed it up quite well in his post . The individual beliefs have existed in some form for some time - don't pat yourself too much for now worshipping something that is not original.

Forget that the Libertarian Party wants to put an end to the IRS(flat tax), the Fed Reserve, pass a Balanced Budget Amendment and end many of the nanny state programs, all the detractors can focus on is drugs! Our drug policy, War Against Drugs is a failure and time to try something else. No one is going to go out and start shooting Heroin because it is legal! Instead of spending billions annually, a small portion can be put into drug education, the rest of the money can be saved to tax payers. Also, consider that all the current policy is doing is making the drug cartels rich beyond imagination! Sarge, these are not modern day hippies. When I attended my first meeting in Baton Rouge, I wore dress slacks and an open collar dress shirt only to realize I had under-dressed.. These young professionals were dressed in suits or dresses and not reeking of Patchoully Oil.

Franco...when I look at the Libertarian platforms I see a number of things I like and agree with, but I also see a number of things that I disagree with and a number of platform statements that are just plain pie in the sky thinking....a couple of examples of what I disagree with:Quotes from 2012 Libertarian Platform - LibertarianConflicts?…”Governments mustnot violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life --accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical forceagainst others”…Abortion“Recognizing that abortion is a sensitiveissue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe thatgovernment should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to eachperson for their conscientious consideration.”

I see a real conflict hereif Governments are to stay out of Abortions, how can Libertarians talk aboutthe “Right to Life”, same holds true on death penalty…you cannot stand for the ‘rightto life’ and yet leave abortion and/ or death sentencing to the individuals….youmust have a controlling force or anything goes!Libertarians go on to say….

Personal
Liberty“Individuals should be free to make choicesfor themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choicesthey make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against anyother individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right tomake choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove ofthose choices.” So no more wars……sounds good…but!InternationalAffairs

“American foreign policy should seek an
Americaat peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense againstattack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreignentanglements. We would end the current
U.S.government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid.We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselvesand their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use ofterrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committedby governments or by political or revolutionary groups.”So what would a pure Libertarian dofollowing 9-11? Or Pearl Harbor?.....!

Drugs - There are those of us who believe the incentives are not in the right order to successfully carry on that war, but believe it should be fought.

Wars - there are times when the toughest guy on the block needs to show that - that there have been no warlike acts until 9-11 on our shores says some of what is done is right.

Free Markets - only exist if there is reciprocation.

As for your's & Franco's banner carrying about the libertarians - I believe Zeus summed it up quite well in his post . The individual beliefs have existed in some form for some time - don't pat yourself too much for now worshipping something that is not original.

You made the statement that tea partiers are the only true conservatives. I was just disagreeing and saying that, while better than establishment republicans, most tea party folks are not true conservatives who want to limit government. Drugs was one of three points I gave as examples on how to shrink govt and once again you choose to focus on that to try and discredit the other two.

Mudminnow...what I said was "Active Tea Party members represent true modern Conservatives" not that they "are the only true conservatives"....very different comments....I was not trying to discredit anything, I just wondered where the heck, the drug issue came from, seemed a bit off topic....my mistake....or as Steve Martin would say EXCUUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEE MEEEEEE.....

Franco...when I look at the Libertarian platforms I see a number of things I like and agree with, but I also see a number of things that I disagree with and a number of platform statements that are just plain pie in the sky thinking....a couple of examples of what I disagree with:Quotes from 2012 Libertarian Platform - LibertarianConflicts?…”Governments mustnot violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life --accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical forceagainst others”…Abortion“Recognizing that abortion is a sensitiveissue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe thatgovernment should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to eachperson for their conscientious consideration.”

I see a real conflict hereif Governments are to stay out of Abortions, how can Libertarians talk aboutthe “Right to Life”, same holds true on death penalty…you cannot stand for the ‘rightto life’ and yet leave abortion and/ or death sentencing to the individuals….youmust have a controlling force or anything goes!Libertarians go on to say….

Personal
Liberty“Individuals should be free to make choicesfor themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choicesthey make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against anyother individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right tomake choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove ofthose choices.” So no more wars……sounds good…but!InternationalAffairs

“American foreign policy should seek an
Americaat peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense againstattack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreignentanglements. We would end the current
U.S.government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid.We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselvesand their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use ofterrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committedby governments or by political or revolutionary groups.”So what would a pure Libertarian dofollowing 9-11? Or Pearl Harbor?.....!

The Abortion Issue should left to the individual states to determine policy. If your state votes to ban them, the people have spoken. Just as within the Repub Party, Libertarians are divided on the issue yet agree that it should be left up to the individual states. Your selective edit of the platform makes it read like there is a conflict when there is not. In a Libertarian state there would not have been a need for the Saudi's to attack us. We were attacked for our dysfunctional Foreign Policy created by NeoCons and the do-gooders. The biggest Lobby in DC is by the Defense Contractors. Wars like Iraq, Vietnam etc made them very rich. We don't suggest turning the other cheek. However, our international efforts need a serious overhaul. To continue with the status quo, as some on this thread are advocating is the death of our nation. Empires do not fall from outside attacks or threats, the fall because of internal policies. The USSR didn't fall because of us, they fell because of their corrupt system, Ditto for Rome, Greece, Persia and others.

Drugs - There are those of us who believe the incentives are not in the right order to successfully carry on that war, but believe it should be fought. This makes absolutely zero sense! Insanity is doing the same thing over and over an expecting a different outcome. It is time to handle this problem with a more sensible approach! Wars - there are times when the toughest guy on the block needs to show that - that there have been no warlike acts until 9-11 on our shores says some of what is done is right. Being the toughest guy didn't stop 911. Brains over toughness always wins and offers a much better long range solution!

Free Markets - only exist if there is reciprocation. Since we haven't had Free Markets, maybe we should give it a try.As for your's & Franco's banner carrying about the libertarians - I believe Zeus summed it up quite well in his post . The individual beliefs have existed in some form for some time - don't pat yourself too much for now worshipping something that is not original. Don't claim to be the original when it come to promoting or voting for Liberties and Freedoms.

Sorry to take it the wrong way swamp collie lover,... I was giving an example of what I think true conservatives think as opposed to the true modern conservative representation. I'll lay off the drugs

What would a libertarian do after 9-11?

I look at 9-11 as a culmination of our failures in the middle east. It is evident that we support folks to further our interest and label them as terrorists when we no longer need them. The roots of 9/11 can be seen back to the early 20th century when we went from non interventionists to imperial after WWII. Since then we have led many covert operations to overthrow governments and replace them with ones that are "on our side". Usually that is good in the short term for us but the long term effects can be seen in the post-9/11 foreign affairs. A libertarian would use 9/11 as evidence of the dangers of our foreign policy and would advocate a non intervention policy.

Marvin, I like your critiques, they keep me honest. But I am not trying to pat my back because I think what I prefer politically is original. Cal me crazy but I believe there was a literal Garden of Eden, and guess what, there was no Govt. Then afterwards, he isrealites wanted government and God said "That's not a good Idea" but they kept asking and he said OK. What eventually happened was the destruction of the Nation of Israel after oppressive kings. So I realize my Idea of limited government is not original and in fact has never been an original man made idea in my opinion.